Newborn hearing screening: Tobramycin and vancomycin are not risk factors for hearing loss

2003 ◽  
Vol 142 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthijs de Hoog ◽  
Bert A. van Zanten ◽  
Wim C. Hop ◽  
Ellen Overbosch ◽  
Nynke Weisglas-Kuperus ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Philippa Horn ◽  
Carlie Driscoll ◽  
Jane Fitzgibbons ◽  
Rachael Beswick

Purpose The current Joint Committee on Infant Hearing guidelines recommend that infants with syndromes or craniofacial abnormalities (CFAs) who pass the universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) undergo audiological assessment by 9 months of age. However, emerging research suggests that children with these risk factors are at increased risk of early hearing loss despite passing UNHS. To establish whether earlier diagnostic audiological assessment is warranted for all infants with a syndrome or CFA, regardless of screening outcome, this study compared audiological outcomes of those who passed UNHS and those who referred. Method A retrospective analysis was performed on infants with a syndrome or CFA born between July 1, 2012, and June 30, 2017 who participated in Queensland, Australia's state-wide UNHS program. Results Permanent childhood hearing loss (PCHL) yield was higher among infants who referred on newborn hearing screening (51.20%) than in those who passed. Nonetheless, 27.47% of infants who passed were subsequently diagnosed with hearing loss (4.45% PCHL, 23.02% transient conductive), but PCHL was generally milder in this cohort. After microtia/atresia, the most common PCHL etiologies were Trisomy 21, other syndromes, and cleft palate. Of the other syndromes, Pierre Robin sequence featured prominently among infants who passed the hearing screen and were subsequently diagnosed with PCHL, whereas there was a broader mix of other syndromes that caused PCHL in infants who referred on screening. Conclusion Children identified with a syndrome or CFA benefit from early diagnostic audiological assessment, regardless of their newborn hearing screening outcome.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 2067-2071
Author(s):  
Gholam-Ali Dashti Khavidaki ◽  
Reza Gharibi

Introduction: Hearing loss is one of the most common congenital disorders. The prevalence of this disorder in different communities has been reported between 3.5 to 9 percent, which can have adverse effects on language learning, communication, and education of children. Also, early diagnosis of this disorder in newborns is not possible without the use of hearing screening. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of newborn hearing screening programs in Zahedan. Method: In this cross-sectional observational study, all babies born in the maternity hospitals of Zahedan city (maternity hospitals of Nabi Akram, Imam Ali, and Social Security hospitals) in 2020, were examined. In order to conduct the study, TEOAE was initially performed for all neonates. Then, based on the results obtained in the ODA test and in case of unsatisfactory response, cases were referred for re-evaluation. Infants who were rejected again in the second stage were immediately subjected to the AABR test and if they failed in this test, they were also subjected to a diagnostic ABR test. Results: Based on our results, 7700 infants were first evaluated with the OAE test. Of these, 580 (8%) had no OAE response. Out of 580 infants rejected in the first stage, 76 infants were also rejected in the second stage; Among them, 8 infants were re-diagnosed with hearing impairments. Finally, out of 3 infants who were diagnosed with hearing loss, 1 (33%) had conductive hearing loss and 2 (67%) had sensorineural hearing loss. Conclusion: Based on the findings of the present study, the implementation of a comprehensive neonatal hearing screening program is necessary for the timely and early diagnosis and treatment of hearing loss. Also, screening can improve the health of children and their personal, social, and educational development in the future. Keywords: Hearing screening, hearing loss, newborns, OAE, AABR


2005 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoichiro Fukuda ◽  
Naomi Toida ◽  
Kunihiro Fukushima ◽  
Yuko Kataoka ◽  
Kazunori Nishizaki

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document